DSLRUsers.com

This is somewhat of a continuation of the themes in a couple of Mic's previous threads on both critiques and on the canon user domination of fred miranda's forums. The FM forums are only slightly less obnoxious than the dpreview camera user forums, IMO. First, a little history.

On every "critique" site that I've seen or participated in, there were user cliques. FM is canon dslr driven, with a snooty attitude toward "snapshot" shooters. On Photosig and a couple of the other big sites (the names escape me at the moment), dslr shooters and "real artists" aligned against the "wannabes". I was a wannabe, shooting a Sony 707/717 at the time.

On one site, for which I paid rather good money to be able to participate for a year, the dslr shooters and a very small number of their friends, were the ones that always got the kudos and the prizes that were awarded every month.

On the paid site, I submitted all of my photos that had been selected as POTD, POTM at various other sites. The "judges" were comprised of several of the site members and were rotated every month. Curiously, even though I submitted my POTD photos every month, to the "new" panel of judges, I never once got a single 1st place vote on any of my images, in the 12 months I was there.

Photosig was a lot more "visual" than all the others and dominated by mere mortals with POS digicams like I had. I had quite a few images that rose to the top of the photosig main page. Inevitably, the photos on the main page would draw negative "critiques" from the "real artists". Usually, those negative comments were about as stupid or over the top as one can imagine. For example, a couple that I'll always remember were incredibly stupid. One "real artist" said that THIS photo was trash because the subject and horizon were centered. Huh
Another brain surgeon said that this shot was trash, because it was centered. Well, yeah, what else should be there?

Fast forward to the present. Mic had mentioned the lack of responses to his posts on FM. Silly boy, FM is dominated by "real photographers" that also happen to use canon gear. The choice of gear is very important, you know. I've also been doing a little fishing there and my latest entry got a few bites on the bait. My favorite response in that thread is a toss-up between the guy that doesn't much like the trees in the photo and the guy that says the building should be tilted toward the center....

Anyway, the point of all this is common sense on this forum. First and foremost is subject matter. An interesting photo is not always technically correct, nor is a technically correct photo always interesting. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and here, unlike most other places, honest comments without regard to a user's equipment or stature are the norm. I'm quite pleased to be a part of your little community. Now, if y'all would just move to Detroit, we could have some great photo safaris.

Nicely said Kerry. I've often thought that a good photograph is one that appeals to the person standing in front of it, for whatever reasons, many of which the viewer won't even be able to explain.

Detroit's a little far at this stage but I'll keep it in mind.

Dare I say, we could put together a pretty good safari over here for you!

KerryPierce wrote:
I've also been doing a little fishing there and my latest entry got a few bites on the bait. My favorite response in that thread is a toss-up between the guy that doesn't much like the trees in the photo and the guy that says the building should be tilted toward the center....

I am just glad that other people also thought this image was a little slanted I still have some trust in my eyes

This image has me baffled as some people see it is straight others think it is crooked???

W00DY PS: Sorry to go off topic

Agreed Guys.

I honestly do not care what sort of camera someone uses, whether it be a dSLR, compact P&S, or a disposable. The proof is in the picture. A friend who works with cattle and may spend weeks at a time in the middle of nowhere, uses disposables exclusively (lifestyle is too rough for anything else) and comes home with some respectable shots.

Brand rivallry goes nowhere with me. I do take an interest in what other people use even if I would never own one myself. Sometimes I wonder if some of those "real artists" were born with a Canon (or Nikon, or whatever) dSLR in their hands, and were blessed with instant talent. BTW Kerry, the bait had my head swimming if I looked at it for too long

Cheers

Matt

Haha Kerry, the whole horizon has to be straight thing has gone too far I think. I remember first seeing this shot and somebody saying it needs to be rotated. And I thought to myself, "why should it, if the ground is actually inclined that way.".

It's like going to San Francisco and taking photos of the hilly roads and somebody saying to you "the roads are a bit slanted, need to rotate the frame so that they're straight".

kipper wrote:
Haha Kerry, the whole horizon has to be straight thing has gone too far I think.

Didn't mean to take it to far... After our discussions in the original thread I just found it funny that other people in another forum were saying the same thing.

You make a good point about the ground being inclined however.

Ok, no more hijakeing this thread Let's stick to the original topic

Kerry, at least you got a few responses on that Forum. Usually A Nikon person gets 1or 2 0r 3 if you're lucky.

I don't care about the brands, I really like the Crisp & Arty images on the FM Forum, a lot are brilliant.

I just use them for inspiration and just leave it at that.

Mic.

Manta wrote:Nicely said Kerry. I've often thought that a good photograph is one that appeals to the person standing in front of it, for whatever reasons, many of which the viewer won't even be able to explain.

This is what I find so refreshing here and so frustrating elsewhere. I realize that we have a common bond with the d70, but I've yet to get the impression from anyone here, that the camera makes any difference. Sure, we are all gearheads to a certain degree, but only to the degree necessary to pursue and fulfill the needs of photography. At least, that is the way it appears from where I sit.

Detroit's a little far at this stage but I'll keep it in mind.

Dare I say, we could put together a pretty good safari over here for you!

That is something I have in the back of my mind, for a day when I have more money and time, to do the things I want to do. I had originally thought of going to Europe, but you guys have surely made the thought of a trip to Oz quite appealing. Well, I'd prolly need to get a passport first....

W00DY wrote:I am just glad that other people also thought this image was a little slanted I still have some trust in my eyes

This image has me baffled as some people see it is straight others think it is crooked???

W00DY PS: Sorry to go off topic

Please don't worry about hijacking the thread or anything like that, Woody. It's part and parcel with what I wanted to talk about.

Some folks like the image, some don't, as would be expected. But, the way perceived flaws are presented, is entirely different here than there, which is part of the point I wanted to make. For example, is this quote from Sidewinder. "It's tilted! get your verticals straight!" That was his complete message. This guy doesn't know me or my work and isn't just giving me a hard time, as friends might do. His response smacks of arrogance and condescension, to me, and is rather repulsive behavior, IMO. Worse, he doesn't acknowledge the fact that the verticals are, in fact, straight.

To directly address why it appears crooked to some and not others, I think it's partly because in both forums, the image is presented on the right side of the screen, rather than centered. On flat screens, that's apparently not as much of an issue. On my large, but normal curved screen, the building tilts all over the place, as I change viewing positions. If you view the image centered, directly from the pbase link, the effect is lessened, at least for me. But, the bottom line is that the tower being on the right side does have the illusion of being tilted...

MattC wrote:Agreed Guys.

I honestly do not care what sort of camera someone uses, whether it be a dSLR, compact P&S, or a disposable. The proof is in the picture.

Precisely.

 BTW Kerry, the bait had my head swimming if I looked at it for too long
Matt

Cool! But, while your head was swimming, did it make you want to whip out your credit card and buy a large, expensive, print?

mic wrote:Kerry, at least you got a few responses on that Forum. Usually A Nikon person gets 1or 2 0r 3 if you're lucky.

Yes, so it appears. I deliberately didn't list equipment in my sig, which is apparently the custom there. I don't think I got a lot of responses because the image is something special. Most of the responses probably came because I refuted Sidewinder's post. If you read them, all of them had something negative to say about the image, which is quite a departure from the general remarks on images posted by the average "bonafide" member.

I don't care about the brands, I really like the Crisp & Arty images on the FM Forum, a lot are brilliant.

I just use them for inspiration and just leave it at that.

Mic.

Quite so. There are some truly excellent photogs there, which makes it well worth the time expended there.

A figure in the foreground, slightly to the left of the frame will not only balance the tower but also will add scale. The picture like it is right now lacks movement and seems monotonous. Sharpness is very good too.
William Rodriguez

 BTW, the person in the left of the pic needs fill flash...that is when you put him in.

Oh yeah, the tower needs fill flash too.

re paragraph 4.

I did !

http://www.photos-of-the-year.com/natur ... puser=3586

dooda wrote:

A figure in the foreground, slightly to the left of the frame will not only balance the tower but also will add scale. The picture like it is right now lacks movement and seems monotonous. Sharpness is very good too.
William Rodriguez

 BTW, the person in the left of the pic needs fill flash...that is when you put him in.

Oh yeah, the tower needs fill flash too.

heh Yeah, that one was a good one too. I'd forgotten that a good landscape is balanced, scaled, isn't monotonous and has movement. Movement?

Well, I have the sb800 strapped to my carry bag, so I'm ready for the fill flash.

darb wrote:re paragraph 4.

I did !

http://www.photos-of-the-year.com/natur ... puser=3586

uhh, darb, you took all those great shots with a dslr, which means you're a "real" photographer and artist and would be accepted as such, by others of like kind.

Seriously, I haven't seen that site before. After my experience at the paid member site, I lost interest in that stuff. But, I do think that those sites can provide valuable experience and feedback and it looks like you've done very well there. Congrats on that!

Kerry

The only thing I can say is that if these photos are "trash", I'd be happy to be your trash collector! I think they're GREAT, and would love to be able to produce shots like this myself!

Tell them to (in polite Aussie terms) "bugger off!" (oops, can I say that in this forum? My kids are asleep just now, so my "no bad words" rule has just slipped! - sorry all)

yeah they bore me to snores too, havent been on in ages.

funny that about dlsr ... not sure if you know christian fletcher ( http://www.christianfletcher.com.au ) had some nice things to say about a few of my shots ... one he particularly rated was taken with my old sony P&S

Nikkofan wrote:Kerry

The only thing I can say is that if these photos are "trash", I'd be happy to be your trash collector! I think they're GREAT, and would love to be able to produce shots like this myself!

Tell them to (in polite Aussie terms) "bugger off!" (oops, can I say that in this forum? My kids are asleep just now, so my "no bad words" rule has just slipped! - sorry all)

Thanks for your very kind words! Doesn't do a lot of good to jam people who act like that. They don't usually care about anything but their little agenda.

darb wrote:yeah they bore me to snores too, havent been on in ages.

funny that about dlsr ... not sure if you know christian fletcher ( http://www.christianfletcher.com.au ) had some nice things to say about a few of my shots ... one he particularly rated was taken with my old sony P&S

Those critique sites can be very useful and entertaining. I learned a great deal from my time on photosig. I'm sure that FM and the other sites are beneficial as well. I found it a lot easier to learn what I needed to learn, after I undertstood the prevalent bias of any particular site.

Fletcher is the one you were talking about in an earlier thread, IIRC. He's got some very lovely photos. I assume that any comments he'd make on your work, would be without any bias, thus something meaningful. Seems like most pros don't care about much other than the final image. Imagine that.

Hi Kerry, I like all of your trash photos. My 2nd fav site to go to is http://www.photo.net I find most of the users here to be genuine (but as with any site, you always get the occasional arrogant wanker) and courtious rather than the examples you have shown.
I am no expert (far from it) but I think as others have said on this post a photo is a photo, it's attributes and appeal make the shot, NOT the camera it was taken on. The D70 is the first Nikon I have owned (I have owned Canons previously). My first digital was a S50 and I still have it and use it as my "take anywhere" camera..I'm not afraid to say it is a great little camera. I would have loved a 20D but looked around, did the comparisons and for price VS quality chose the D70 and I love it, but thats not to say I would not love a 20D if I owned one.
Sometimes people have nothing better to do than to criticise.
Gee I hope no one else on this site sees this!

Hi Marcus,

Thanks for the compliment. I hadn't seen photo.net before, that I can recall. Just from the quick glance, it looks quite similar to photosig.

Your method of choosing your dslr is about identical to mine. I was about ready to buy the 10d, when the d70 was announced. IMO, the cameras were close enough in specs, to make it a toss-up. Either camera would meet my needs and then some. The $500 difference gave me 500 reasons to go with Nikon.